Since there is no Bolt Action Rifles category, I'm posting this here.

Looking for owner evaluation: What do you think of the New Model 70 CRF from Portugal?

I hope they put a cheekpiece on their featherweight and short action stocks!

Excellent. I have several and shot several. Very good!

I have one with synthetic stock in 308 Win. It is an exceptional rifles and extremely accurate with my hand loads. If it’s something you’re interested in don’t hesitate they are great rifles.

I have one in .375 H&H, the Alaskan model. It was shipped with a defective striker spring. Spring was very weak and the rifle misfired about one in three shots. Took some time to diagnose the problem, and a year to get the replacement parts. So while I have owned it for three years I have not hunted with it yet. Seems well enough built otherwise, but my confidence is a bit shaken.

Winchester/FN discontinued this year all Wood Stocked, Stainless Steel Model 70s. That includes the Featherweight and Supergrade.

They were my favorite. Few are left out there.

Young guys won't buy wood; in fact our local gun shop will not stock any; demand is close to zero.
It is a business after all, driven by demand just like any other consumer product. Our local car dealer does not carry buggy whips either.
As for the new M70s; they are fine; it did take me a while to get used to the fine barrel threads. Not used to those. I threaded one last month....they are quicker to thread though. Shallower, you know....

Not sure this is indicative of factory rifles.my Portugal 30-06 Super Grade was sent to Hill Country Rifles for a complete accuracy job by the previous owner. Action trued, pillar bedded, glass bedded, trigger job, target crown, Talley rings lapped etc. My first group after I bought it was .70 inch for three shots at 100 with Federal Premium 180 gr Nosler Partitions. I haven't got around to working up a handload yet. It worked just fine for this year's season.

That work is a waste of money on a hunting rifle; they shoot fine as is. I wish they there were still made here but the point is that the quality is good from Portugal.

The components are made here. The barrels are still made in S. Carolina.

Somehow, it is cheaper to ship everything twice.

Of course, there is the issue of the mis-located extractor groove, which affects feeding and reduces primary extraction. The groove is located roughly .020 further forward than it should be, while the extractor hook is located at the same distance ahead of the protrusion which rides in this groove. BACO denies there is any such issue, by the way, although every one I have measured is messed up. Apart from this manufacturing defect, the quality is pretty good. Regards, Bill

How can this affect anything? .020 clearance? I just put barrels on two of them and they worked fine beforehand. Affects feeding? I don't understand this one. Reduces primary extraction?

I suspect you understand it perfectly well, but I'll explain anyway. Locating the extractor hook .020 further away from the bolt face also locates it .020 ahead of the rim. This effectively eliminates .020" of the extractor cam. Now this may not be a big deal to most people, but the fact remains, the groove is located .020" too far forward when compared to a pre-64, or Model 54 bolt.
How does this affect feeding? well, the extractor hook contacts the front of the extractor groove on the case when it picks up the cartridge. This pushes the cartridge to the left. I have always considered it to be proper for the extractor to just hold the cartridge straight in the bolt. Maybe others don't care.
If the extraction cam is not giving full service anyway, taking another .020 away can have an effect.
By the way, if I put a new extractor on a pre-64 bolt, it fits like the original and works the same. The mis-location of the extractor groove is obvious and measurable. It is a defect and should have been corrected (a simple tool offset in the program would do it) years ago. Regards, Bill.

As I said, the ones I have had worked fine.
What failures have you had/seen? Or is this just a hypothetical thing?

Unless it creating malfunctions, I do not see the point.

You get better extractor tension, ejection, and feeding a the FN Mosel 70 then any Ruger M77 Hawkeye. That conversation has been had.

I just vaporized a couple bottles of Bailey’s cream.

There is a funny video on YouTube comparing a brand new Featherweight to a brand new, out of the box new Remington Model 700.

Guess which one won’t feed? Remington.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Young guys won't buy wood;

Tom- I am about to be 40 and I love wood (only on guns though) Does that make me a young man still..?! haha...

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
As I said, the ones I have had worked fine.
What failures have you had/seen? Or is this just a hypothetical thing?

There is nothing hypothetical about reduced extraction capability. There is nothing hypothetical about deflection of the bolt by contact of the extractor with the front of the extraction groove of the case. The bottom line is that it is a flaw. If the flaw doesn't bother you, that is fine. It bothers me. What bothers me even more is their refusal to correct it. If the new Model 70 is not flawed in this respect, then all of those pre-64 and Model 54's, not to mention the 1903 Springfields, were.
I first noticed this when I rechambered a 30/06 to 308 Norma (still requested, from time to time) and noticed the extractor was so far away from the bolt face. It didn't hold the case well when feeding and it didn't hold the case well when extracting/ejecting. It functioned, but it was wrong. A glance at the bolt and the mis-location of the groove was obvious. I called BACO about it and the guy I talked to said they had never noticed anything. This told me they were either unobservant with dismal QC, or they just didn't give a shit, or maybe both.
Anyway, the mislocation of the groove is a real thing. Plainly neither the manufacturer nor most customers, care about it, but it bugs me. In the world of firearms manufacture, .020" is huge. It's a flaw. Regards, Bill.

Except they do not fell to extract. Again, alll my factory rifles over 20 have great extractor tension. Much better than its closets competitors.

The FN Rifles which technically go back to the late 80s, handle a ruptured case from a gas perspective much better than a pre 64.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Except they do not fell to extract. Again, alll my factory rifles over 20 have great extractor tension. Much better than its closets competitors.

The FN Rifles which technically go back to the late 80s, handle a ruptured case from a gas perspective much better than a pre 64.

Actually, they handle gas from a ruptured case exactly the same as a pre-64, though they are helped somewhat by the inclusion of the little gas block. By the way, this part can be retro-fitted to a pre-64, if one wants to do so.
I never said they fail to extract. I said they do not extract as well. They made an error in the location of the groove in the bolthead and have continued to build that error into every rifle for forty years, apparently out of sheer obstinance. Clearly, you are OK with that. I think it is a failing. When Remington chose to build all of their 700's with the handle in the wrong place, so they had zero primary extraction, and then doubled down on it, I thought that was a failing too.
Either someone at Winchester screwed up on the drawings and got the dimensions wrong, or the machinist set up the program wrong. It's an error. If I made that error, I would expect to be called on it.
There are aspects of the newer Model 70's which I think are better than the originals. Alignment is better. Finish is better in most respects. Certainly better than the later years of the pre-64's. I like the use of VEE threads on the bolt sleeve. I like the geometry of the MOA trigger. The machining is great, except for that dimensional error. In machining, dimensions matter. Regards, Bill

Went to the gunshop to get some mag pistol primers. yes they are still to expensive.
Took the bolt from my pre 64 to compare with the new M70 they had on the rack.
I see what you mean Bill.
Very visible when you slip a case in the two.
Like that rattle in your truck, I didnt notice until you pointed it out. Now it will be all I see!

Foe us that do not know machining, what can be done to fix this problem if one buys one of these rifles?

The best solution would be to get someone who makes Model 70 extractors to make some which have the hook located where it is supposed to be, in relation to the bolt face when installed on these bolts.
The next best solution would be to build up the hook and re-cut it to accomplish the same thing.
A great fix, going forward, would be for Winchester to fix the program and do them correctly from the factory. Doesn't seem likely though. Regards, Bill

The m essage here is that CNC bean counters still need a couple knowlegeable gunsmiths on the pay roll

I have an early production FWT 30-06 that had piece of wood I couldn’t pass up I got in I believe was 2008, there’s a year engraved on the floor plate. It’s a very nice factory rifle and has pretty good trigger. I’ve only shot my hand loads with 180gr partitions and it’s basically a MOA rifle and consistent. I put Leupold VX III 2.5x8 on it for it’s a relatively small and light scope. I’ve taken a couple deer with it but haven’t put it to any stressful uses.

Bill, can that abortion of a MOA trigger be adjusted to a good pull?
Why would winchester screw with an easy to work on, simple trigger like they had!

I'm only guessing here, because I am unable to see into the mind of a Winchester engineer but there were two aspects of the original trigger design which were addressed with the MOA trigger. Make that three.
The first issue was that the design of the original trigger pivoted at the top of the trigger lever. This meant, because the mass of the trigger was suspended from this pivot, one could bang the butt on the ground and, if the trigger was set below about three pounds, the rifle would fire. Now, I always figured this was not a big deal as long as you didn't make a habit of looking into the muzzle while banging your loaded rifle on the ground, but there it is.
The second perceived issue was that, because the contact between the sear and cocking piece was angled, the bolt was deflected upward when the rifle was cocked. The new trigger uses a vertical contact between the two, reducing the amount of upward deflection. In addition, a little wear on the sear or cocking piece and safety function was affected.
The third issue is simply that the original trigger was adjustable, leading to problems related to improper adjustment or modification.
So, those were (perhaps) the reasons for the change. The pivot was moved to the center of mass of the trigger lever. This eliminated the first issue. The change to the vertical contact between the sear and cocking piece took care of the second. Eliminating any adjustments except weight of pull, took care of the third.
I have not tried to install sear engagement and overtravel adjustments on the MOA trigger, but I'm pretty sure it could be done. I don't hate the trigger. I think they could have done a lot better (look at Kimber's trigger for a simple, functional, trigger), but it's OK. Regards, Bill

I checked the one at the gunshop with their trigger scale. Just above to just below 5 pounds.
never could make the old 70 trigger go off set to 2 1/2# ( my favorite) pounding the butt on the ground or whacks with a rubber mallet.
Yes the Kimber is very nice.

I always thought the whole "pound the butt on the floor" concern was overblown, but the internet made it seem like a common failing. I have one M70 trigger which pulls 14oz. If I drop it from 6 inches on concrete, it will hold. From a foot, it fires. Again, I just promised myself to avoid looking into the muzzle while dropping it on the floor. Set up to two pounds, the pre-64 will hold, but the post 64 will not. More mass in the trigger, I suppose.
Like I said, I'm just guessing about their thought process. I think there were more lawyers involved than gunsmiths. Regards, Bill

I think most people want a trigger to pass some sort of test. Bench rest shooters dont worry about it.
I usually give my hunting rifles the floor thump, but also a palm whack. I give a good smack on the stock outside the trigger area. Not a bitch slap, but a good, split your lips, rattle your brains, smack. If those dont release the sear, I feel good.

Thanks for your insights and opinions Bill, I learned a few things and appreciate your experienced comments.

In regards to LongWalkers post I to had a problem with a weak Striker Spring after maybe 200 rounds I started to get light primer strikes ther original spring if my memories serves me was 24#s I replaced it with a 30# Wolf spring which has served me well...
Sadly they replaced the easy to remove firing pin spring retainer with a c clip
which needs and extra hand to remove